Weight loss support with a spiritual element. I will keep you posted on my journey in the hopes that you will join me in becoming the person God wants you to be. Don't worry about being religious. Come as you are.

Friday, February 3, 2012

Regulate Sugar?

The nanny state is alive and well. I find this hard to swallow (yuk, yuk). Is it any wonder people don't use their brains for decisions about their diets? When did it become the government's job to oversee what people eat and drink? As long as there is a market for anything, there will be someone who figures out how to supply that market. I weep for the future.

Did prohibition work during the Roaring 20's. Remember black market cigarettes?

http://www.no-smoke.org/learnmore.php?id=616

Some also want to make it illegal to smoke in the car with those under 18 present. Policemen are going to be expected to enforce this? This line of reasoning would make it illegal to smoke in the home if people have kids.

Is passing laws the way to change behavior?

I am going to introduce a law that will make it illegal to have a second helping of food. In this bill I will also include that it be illegal to have dessert if one's BMI is over 32. There will be mandatory time spent exercising and I will have a chip embedded in the overweight so a report can be produced to make sure this is done. This chip will also record how much water is consumed and the 64 oz. minimum will be strictly enforced.

I am in utter total agreement with you on this one. The nanny state and governmental over regulation overall gets me seething with more hate than the media has for people like you and me... Seriously, if this doesn't stop I'm going to end up in Bermuda with my husband working for a reinsurance company. There are many companies there for him to work for, plenty of sun and I could just give up and work on my tan. Ugh, the whole idea of sugar as a toxin is just disgusting.

Yellow Rose - let me know where you will be in Bermuda. We can hook up and eat something sweet :-) Voters don't have much longer to get these kinds of people out of office. It's arrogant liberals who think they know what's best for us all. I better stop.

Couldn't agree more. I think you commented on something I wrote about government crop subsidies a week or two ago. If the gov't begins regulating sugar (they won't, but the fact that some weirdos want them to is worth discussing), it would be not out of concern for public healthy and safety, but, as always, for the almighty dollar. I found a stat from a couple of years ago where I learned the government subsidizes TOBACCO CROPS to the tune of $1 BILLION per year...and then collects tax revenue of $19 BILLION per year...nice return on investment while at the same time putting a couple million into half-hearted anti-smoking ad campaigns and package warnings and putting, ummmm...NOTHING into real treatment for addicted smokers who want to quit (I've always wondered why there is no detox center for smokers as there is for drugs and alcohol...? Thoughts?) as it is the most prevalent chemical addiction in our society and reportedly the most difficult to quit. Obviously there's a financial reason the government gives lip service to smoking cessation while pouring money into tobacco and reaping $$$ from its sales. But I digress. NO SUGAR BANS. I've banned it from myself/kids and that is personal responsibility.

Norma - thanks for your thoughts. Our government is too big and too corrupt. Are we getting what we deserve? - too many sheep? Even though you say regulating sugar won't happen - isn't this how it starts? How did all regulations begin? What was the motivation behind these regulations? You covered it well.